#ie probably a good five years hence at least | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

atelier-dayz · 4 years

Note

⭐star⭐

The Patching Up Scene! 8D

After they hand off an excited Skywalker to the pilots in the cockpit, Jango isn’t completely sure why he follows Kenobi, though part of it is curiosity and another part practicality. Kenobi shoots him a questioning look when they reach his quarters.

“Do you need help with some of those wounds?” he offers. There’s one he can see, wrapping around Kenobi’s right side to his back. Jetii powers or not, he doubts Kenobi can treat it properly on his own.

“Oh…” Kenobi hesitates for a moment, but ultimately nods. “Yes, please, if you don’t mind.”

Okay, I honestly did not plan for this scene to happen! It just naturally happened, the next logical thing. Obvs Jango likes Obi, but also after a battle, you patch up your fighters. Nothing to question about it. *nods*

Between the two of them, they gather up the ship’s medkit, a small basin for the antiseptic wash, and a few scraps of clean cloth, before returning to the jetiise’s room.

The moment Kenobi unties his belt and starts unwrapping his tabard and tunics, sand begins skittering to the floor. Jango eyes the growing pile, thankful it isn’t his problem to clean up.

“Shouldn’t have laid down in the sand. You’ll be getting rid of it for days,” he says, and Kenobi shoots him a weak glare.

“I was tired,” Kenobi grumbles. “Besides, sand gets everywhere anyways.”

Kenobi strips down to his smalls with all the modesty -- or rather, lack thereof -- of a warrior who has been in front of too many medics. The myriad of scars of different ages on his body is certainly evidence of that. Jango is still baffled, because he’s fairly sure jetiise were less...careless with their padawans than that, but he saves those questions for later.

Obi’s childhood, man...and the scars you see are only the ones on the outside.

The wounds from the darjetii, now fully visible, makes Jango want to hiss in sympathy. Kenobi has two shallow burns on his left arm and one on his right forearm to join the old jetii’kad scars. But the Zabrak had cut deep into Kenobi’s right upper arm. Jango couldn’t quite see bone, but Kenobi is kriffing lucky to not have any nerve damage - at least, not that he could tell. Other than the wound that wraps around Kenobi’s side that he’d noted earlier, the last is a slash across the side of his left thigh, not as deep as the ugly one on his arm but deep enough.

I imagine some of the old lightsaber sabers came from too many tussles with Bruck.

You’ve got some pretty important nerves and arteries in your upper arm ie the radial nerve LOL The outer side of your thigh, not as much, hence the instructions for epipen injections to be given against the side of your thigh. 8D /random trivia

He’s honestly impressed that Kenobi could walk or move his arms so freely, much less continue fighting the way he had.

“Well, at least you’re not bleeding,” is all Jango can say.

Hurraaay instant cauterization (oof the burned tissue though)

Kenobi grimaces and sits himself down on the bunk they’d set the supplies on.

“Painkillers?” Jango asks, opening the medkit.

Kenobi shakes his head. “I’m alright for now. Perhaps before I sleep,” Kenobi says. “The Force helps me dull the pain.”

Jango huffs. More jetii sorcery, though that explains a lot.

He finds the antiseptic wash and pours it into the basin over the cloth they’d collected. They clean their hands, and Kenobi starts wiping clean his left arm, careful over the burns.

I almost glossed over this stuff, but it pained me to not mention CLEAN HANDS. Clean hands during wound care, folks. I restrained myself from having them dig out gloves or something LOL

“I’ve got your side,” Jango warns Kenobi, before pressing a dampened cloth to his right side. He starts cleaning the wound from Kenobi’s front before moving to his back.

Jango should have expected it, but somehow he hadn’t. Up close, he sees barely-there Lichtenberg scars that he’s seen before on others, from electro-jabbers held too long against skin. He also sees whip scars across Kenobi’s upper back, faded enough for Jango to tell he had gotten them far too young.

The slave guards on Bandomeer, to quote, “beat them savagely with an electro-jabber.” I imagine prolonged contact with an electro-jabber would lead to injury and scarring like you’d see in a lighting strike but smaller/more localized. (Note: Some caution if you google what it looks like!)

“How old were you?” he can’t help himself from asking, but managing at least to keep the words less sharp than he had wanted.

“What?” Kenobi starts to twist to look at him but thinks better of it.

Jango brushes a hand along one of the whip scars instead of explaining, and Kenobi stiffens for a moment, before relaxing. He moves on to cleaning his leg wound, and Jango thinks he might not answer, which is fair. Jango resumes cleaning the side wound.

“I was just shy of thirteen," Kenobi suddenly says. "Deepsea mining on Bandomeer."

Jango curses under his breath and has to keep himself from inadvertently pressing too hard on Kenobi’s wound.

Thirteen, as a mining slave. A deepsea mining slave.

Every slave knows that deepsea mining is the one of the worst positions to be in. The life expectancy is five to ten years maximum. Kriffing hell, some slavers use deepsea mining as a threat to make their slaves behave.

This I unfortunately based on what I learned about slavery on sugar cane plantations in the (American) South. Being sent South, to a sugar cane plantation, was a threat (Northern) slave owners would use to make their slaves behave. Life expectancy decreased dramatically if you were working on a sugar cane plantation. (If you’re in New Orleans for tourist purposes, many people recommend Oak Alley Plantation. But that’s because it’s very pretty. It glosses over its history of slavery though, and its tour focuses on the owners. Please go visit Whitney Plantation too. They do not gloss over the history and all the awful things that happened there. The tour guides are phenomenal, and you learn a lot from them.)

"It was only for a week, but it was long enough to...understand," Kenobi murmurs.

Long enough for him to have scars to this day. To say nothing about however it must have kriffed him up at thirteen.

"One day would have been too long," Jango growls. "Where was your jetii master in all this?"

He gestures roughly at Kenobi’s right arm, and Kenobi holds out his arm for Jango. Jango begins carefully cleaning around the deep wound.

“He wasn’t my master then,” Kenobi says. “To make a long and rather complicated story short, I had been sent away to AgriCrops on Bandomeer as a--failed initiate, and got myself involved in Master Qui-gon’s mission on Bandomeer. I discovered Offworld Mining tampering with AgriCorps and was captured...I woke up as a slave on one of their deepsea mining platforms.”

Even that sparse a recounting is too much to unpack. But foremost on his mind, the jetiise had sent Kenobi away to be a farmer? With everything Kenobi has said and especially considering the duel Jango had just witnessed...had they been blind? If there is such a thing as a good jetii, Kenobi is likely it.

👀👀👀 @ Jango

“How’d you get out?” Jango asks.

“Master Qui-gon found me. He disabled my collar, and we escaped the guards. We managed to disable the other slaves’ collars once we were on the mainland as well. They revolted and freed themselves,” Kenobi says with a small quirk of his lips.

Jango grunts in approval. “Good on them.” He drops his cloth into the basin. “Let’s get patches on your burns and your side. Your arm definitely needs stitches. It’s up to you on the leg.”

Kenobi looks at his leg wound thoughtfully. “Are there any of those deep incision BactaBonds?” he asks. “If not, then stitches will do.”

Mentioned it on AO3, but I based BactaBond off of Dermabond. it’s Dermabond but more magical because bacta.

Jango pulls out all the bacta patches they’ll need for Kenobi’s burns and side wound before digging around the kit. Sure enough, he finds a tube of BactaBond and the roll of mesh tape that came with it.

“You’re in luck.”

He hands the BactaBond and the mesh tape to Kenobi. Kenobi nods in thanks and begins fixing up his leg wound. Jango starts placing patches over the wound wrapping around his side.

Okay, so I want to note that when you have burnt up tissue, you’re supposed to remove the dead tissue when cleaning up burns because that dead tissue isn’t gonna do you much, but I didn’t want to get more detailed than I already was, and I decided to just...handwave it as part of the magical bacta healing effect LOL

They work in silence. Jango knows from experience the BactaBond and mesh tape can be an absolute kriffing pain to apply properly, so he tries not to disturb Kenobi as he finishes patching up his side.

He waits for Kenobi to finish with the mesh tape before handing him some dressing to cover the whole thing. They quickly cover up the burns on Kenobi’s arms with bacta patches before finally addressing the deep cut on his right arm.

“Are you sure you don’t want pain killers?” Jango asks, assessing the wound. It really is a nasty injury. With the BactaBond, he could probably get away with one layer of stitches instead of two or three.

“I will be alright,” Kenobi says again and hands Jango the BactaBond.

Jango grunts. “Suit yourself.”

He applies the BactaBond into the wound before pressing the wound edges firmly together. Kenobi doesn’t even flinch, sitting there quietly with his eyes closed while Jango picks up the suture needle and begins stitching close the wound.

I would like to draw this scene one day. Or someone can draw it for me. LOL

After some consideration, Jango says, “I was sold to a spice transport.” He keeps his focus on closing the wound as tidily as he can, but he can feel Kenobi’s gaze on his face. “I was there for two years.”

"...How did you end up escaping?" he asked.

"Pirates attacked the ship. I freed myself in the confusion and ended up making a deal with the pirates.”

“Quite a few pirates would take the spice and the slaves…” Kenobi remarks.

“I had the upper hand on them. Besides, ‘Hondo Ohnaka would never deal with slavery’,” he quotes, “or so he claims.”

"Ah," Kenobi says in the tone of everyone who has ever met Hondo Ohnaka. Jango pauses in his suturing to look at Kenobi.

"You’ve met."

Kenobi sighs, sounding as exasperated as anyone who has dealt with Ohnaka. “It was a very...trying mission.” He smiles wryly.

HONDO OHNAKA IS A DELIGHT. Also I love the idea that the pirates who attacked that spice transport and gave Jango the opportunity to escape were Hondo’s crew. Idea thanks to blue_sunshine’s Desert Storm.

Also the ways in which Jango and Obi can connect with their experiences. Just aaaaaaah *flailing Kermit*

“I am not surprised.” Jango finishes up the sutures and assesses his handiwork. It’ll do. “Patch or plain dressing on top?” he asks. He thinks plain dressing would do just fine, but the patch might not hurt considering the extent of the wound.

Kenobi gestures to the patch, so Jango applies the patch.

“Done. Listen to Jinn and get some rest. I was tired just watching that fight,” Jango says.

Kenobi gives him a half-hearted glare, but doesn’t make a word in protest as Jango stands and starts collecting all their first aid detritus. Despite his protests, Jango suspects Kenobi’s ready to pass out.

An hour long high speed lightsaber duel in the sand. Can’t believe Obi wasn’t asleep on his feet. LOL

#mand'alor and his jetii #manyangledone #miya replies #director's cut meme

25 notes · View notes

sic-vita · 7 years

Text

Addressing the misconceptions of Harry Potter and the Cursed Child

Ok, so I’ve been scrolling through Tumblr and seeing posts bashing Harry Potter and the Cursed Child and I just felt I wanted to address some of the reasons for why it’s deemed as awful and “not canon”.

FIRSTLY, it’s a script NOT a novel. I think many of the problems come with people reading it as a novel – but having said that, I can’t blame them because the play at the moment is accessible to less than 0.01% of Harry Potter fans. Still, it is A SCRIPT and words on the page might not translate the way they do on stage.

SECONDLY, “canon” is a term used to describe an officialised body of work ie. The canonical scriptures, the literary canon – with regards to the contemporary world, canon means the works created officially by the author, as opposed to works by fans. So to say a work created by the author and her aides themselves is “fanfiction” is just weird because it is linguistically not accurate, no matter how much the work feels like how fan works would normally read. Whether someone personally agrees with it as an addition to an existing series, it is canon because it is created by the author and people she has worked with, not fans.

Having said this, it is up to people if they want to see Cursed Child as the “eighth story”. As much as I like it, I prefer to keep the seven novels as an enclosed, definitive unit and see Cursed Child just as an exploration and extension of the Harry Potter world, rather than a concrete “eighth story”.

DISCLAIMER: I’m not saying the play is perfect – there are bizarre bits ie. The trolley witch becoming Wolverine etc. but that a lot of the accusations laid on the play are just unfair and unjustified because they aren’t thought through clearly – they’re random bits of information floating online that people jump on and then repeat WITHOUT CONTEXT

MISCONCEPTIONS AND DEBUNKING THEM:

1. The Timeturner plot doesn’t make sense

In Prisoner of Azkaban, the timeturner only went back A FEW HOURS – here they are going back years. Even in POA, they were warned that timeturners run the risk of the user going back to accidentally kill themselves – which is impossible if it really works along the fixed timeline that POA purports. Cursed Child SPECIFICALLY states that these timeturners are different and hence so dangerous because of how they can go back decades ago to change things up.

What I LOVE about the timeturner plot is it addresses the very simple, basic question of whether we can bring someone back from the dead – so many fans have asked why doesn’t Harry go back in time to bring back his parents/Sirius/whoever else etc. – and this shows why:

The past belongs in the past – even if it’s painful and terrible, we have to accept the past and leave behind our regrets over it. And I think it’s a beautiful message.

2. Why is Hugo/Neville/Teddy/xx character not in the play

Again, it is A PLAY – it isn’t a 500 page novel with a full range of characters to deal with – the play focuses mostly on two boys and it already runs over five hours. A play doesn’t cover every single thing especially in a very extensive world like JKR’s. It just goes with the format of the media. Yes, it would have been nice to see these characters but it would have been even weirder if they appeared on stage and then didn’t follow through by being the focal point of the plot.

3. Why don’t they show in-between bits like: how the polyjuice potion was brewed, how xx learnt about xx etc etc.

This follows on from the previous question – which is that in a play there are time skips, jumps and montages because people are physically sitting in a theatre watching things unfold in real-time. If all the in-between bits were filled in, everyone would be there for days.

4. How can Cedric ever be a death eater??

Yes, people are right. In the world JKR built Cedric would never be a death eater. But that’s precisely the point – in that segment of the play, they were in an ALTERNATE REALITY where even good, kind Scorpius could be someone that tortures his fellow students. This is an ALTERNATE REALITY CEDRIC – and I like how it shows everyone has light and dark in them and they choose which part to act on. Even the sweetest people like Cedric and Scorpius can be embittered and made dark if they chose to act on that part of themselves – and isn’t that an enlightening commentary on human nature itself?

5. Harry’s parenting: “I wish you weren’t my son”

People quote this line as if Harry said it out of the blue to Albus. IN CONTEXT, Albus’ line before this is “I wish you weren’t my dad” – in the play, Albus has been provoking and pushing Harry before this by mocking his past and his heroism and Harry finally snaps. Parents aren’t perfect and Harry definitely isn’t. I love how they explore Harry’s issues in being a father and his own problematic father figures in his youth – that confrontation with Dumbledore was something I’ve always wanted.

6. Harry being a douche and keeping Scorpius from Albus

IN CONTEXT, this happened during the first ALTERNATE REALITY where Harry is clearly a different person from the usual one. He’s rude and more bad-tempered than usual and he snaps at McGonagall and Ginny. Perhaps it isn’t so obvious on page, but on stage when the alternate realities occur and everyone is suddenly different and even the stage is set up differently, it’s very clear that this is NOT THE SAME – people are “out of character” PRECISELY BECAUSE it is an ALTERNATE REALITY

7. Harry is Out of Character

Not sure if these people remembered book 5 Harry – when that book came out I thought he was out of character too. Harry had a temper and he shouted and he sometimes was bad at communicating his feelings – it’s quintessential Harry – I don’t see what’s out of character about that.

8. Queerbaiting

Yes I agree that Scorpius asking Rose out came as a surprise even in the theatre, but the way the actors played it was also so ambiguous. Rather than the scene being a straightforward rejection of an Albus-Scorpius relationship, I felt the acting left it very open. Scorpius asks out Rose, but then he hugs Albus and says he has a “new version” of them in his head. So clearly, it is more complex and ambiguous than people think.

9. Voldemort has a daughter

Again, this does come out as a shocker but it isn’t as outrageous as it is on page. People say Voldemort can’t have children because he doesn’t know love – then again, sexual activity may take place without love, which it probably did in Voldemort’s case. It’s not something that is completely improbable but it does come as a twist in the plot which makes for very entertaining theatre.

10. Snape is redeemed in a way that overlooks his previous character flaws

Two words: ALTERNATE REALITY – Scorpius met a Snape that saw Harry Potter die, a Snape that failed both Lily and Harry and was fighting a lost cause with hardly any support this time. There was no Order of Phoenix or guidance from Dumbledore. So it is clear that this Snape behaves differently. Also, I saw it as a way for someone to finally tell Snape that his sacrifice was acknowledged – in the main books, Snape’s work is never known until after he dies, but now he just gets to hear that people acknowledge his heroism (and he was heroic, though deeply flawed and a terrible teacher)

11. Cursed Child erases the “all was well” from the last book

Yes. And I love it. “All was well” was so unrealistic. These were people who’ve been through so much, can they really live life normally and calmly with nothing else happening to them? At the very least, they have to deal with the trauma of battling as children and teenagers, and especially for Harry, all the baggage and tragedy he carries with him. And I LOVE that Cursed Child dealt with that unflinchingly.

If there are other questions and comments people have on the play, I’ll love to hear and discuss it and even add to this list. Just thought that since the same arguments were being rehashed again and again, I’d want to at least add my piece to it and give my thoughts.

#Harry Potter #Harry potter and the cursed child #the cursed child #hpcc #cursed child

2 notes · View notes

luluuu-blog · 5 years

Text

St Mary the Virgin, Bishopsbourne, Kent

I thought I had visited St Mary years ago. And indeed I had, or stood on the green in front of it, but didn’t set foot inside.

This I didn’t realise until Saturday when I was standing outside it looking at the row of cottages leading to the lych gate, I knew the scene was new to me.

The drizzle was still falling, so I could not linger in the churchyard, and scampered along the south side of the building, looking for the porch, but there wasn’t one. Instead a simple door near to the chancel gave way when I turned the handle, after stepping over the void that acts as a drain for rainwater falling from the roof.

I tried hard to find the lightswitches, as in the gloom of the early afternoon, it was almost dark inside. Even when I found the switches in the south chapel, there seemed to be no power to them, so the church remained in half darkness.

What I did see, and was dazzled by, were tiles used to line the lower part of the chancel walls, like a mosaic, creating fantastic patterns.

—————————————–

A mainly thirteenth century church restored by Sir George Gilbert Scott. There is a high window which originally shed light onto the Rood figures (see also Capel le Ferne). Some medieval glass survives in the heads of the windows in the chancel showing angels holding crowns. The west window was designed by Morris and Co in 1874 to commemorate a former Rector, whilst the south chapel has a set of continental glass brought here by the Beckingham family from their house in Essex. Above the nave arcade is a good set of murals including a figure of St Nicholas. The famous Elizabethan theologian Richard Hooker is commemorated in the chancel.

www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Bishopsbourne

——————————————-

Bishopsbourne is another example of a parish church belonging to the church (the archbishop, in this case), which was totally rebuilt on a large(r) scale in the 13th century (cf. Chartham). The chancel, as rebuilt, was as wide as the nave, and there is no chancel arch (and probably never has been). The nave and chancel both show at least two phases of work of about the mid to later 13th century, so it seems likely that a rebuilding programme was being carried on in stages during the 2nd half of the 13th century (no sign exists, above-ground, of the earlier church). Perhaps the earliest visible work are the two pairs of two-light windows on either side of the chancel. They have geometrical tracery and all sit on an internal moulded string course (there is medieval glass at the top of all these windows). This string course rises up in the east wall, and has on it the five-light east window, within trefoiled lancets, which is perhaps slightly later in date. There is also a late 13th century piscina at the east end of the south wall (though with a 19th century back wall). Externally the N.E. and S.E. corners of the chancel have angle buttresses, but these are heavily restored. It is also just possible that there were further geometrical windows further west in the chancel, which were covered/removed when the 15th century additions were made. In the nave, as John Newman has pointed out, the two slender arcades have slight differences (N. capitals more complex than the S. ones). Also that the nave abaci are undercut, while the chancel string course is not. Originally the south arcade was at least three bays long (ie. longer than the present nave), but on the north this is not so clear. The aisles themselves are very narrow, with shed roofs continuing the slope of the main nave roof (though this shape may only be 15th century when the aisles were remodelled). The only surviving feature of the 13th century in the outer aisle walls (again heavily restored externally in the 19th century) is the north doorway with its niche (called a stoup by some writers, but not necessarily one) immediately to the east. This doorway has slightly projecting pilasters on either side, and the whole was covered by a porch until 1837. The second main phase of work took place in the later 15th century. First, the whole of the west end of the church was demolished and a new tower was constructed with diagonal buttresses. The tower is of three main stages with the top stage rendered. The whole of the south face is mostly rendered. As this was being built, short walls were erected from the eastern diagonal buttresses to the 13th century arcade (ie. leaving the western ends of the aisles outside). (This is perhaps due to a population decrease in the parish). New west walls (containing two light perpendicular square headed windows) to the shortened aisles were also built, and four new 2-light perpendicular windows were inserted into the outer aisle walls. Along the top of the inside of the aisles walls a new moulded timber stringcourse was made (the roofs were perhaps also remade, but they are hidden beneath plaster in the aisles, and the main nave roof was replaced in 1871). At the west end of the nave the new short north and south walls contain five 3-light windows with perpendicular tracery under a 2-centred arch in their heads. On the upper nave walls, above the arcade, are remains of some fine painted figures on a painted ‘ashlar’ background. These were perhaps painted after the 15th century rebuilding (a date of around 1462 for the rebuilding is perhaps suggested by the will of William Harte (see below). At the extreme west end of the nave are two areas (N. and S.) of in situ medieval floor tiles. It is just possible that they predate the tower building work. (They must continue eastwards under the pews). There is also a 15th cent. octagonal font bowl (on a 1975 base). The southern chapel (the Bourne Pew after the Reformation) with its diagonal buttresses and 3-light east window is also 15th century but it was very heavily restored in c. 1853 (date over new S. door). It has a separate roof (and plaster ceiling). The rectangular N. addition with a plinth is also 15th century and was perhaps built as a vestry. It had an external door and only a small door into the chancel until the rebuilding of 1865, when a massive new arch was put in to accommodate a new organ (earlier the organ was under the tower arch). At this time also a totally new pitched roof was built over the vestry, perhaps replacing a low pitched 15th century roof. There is a high up window on the north side above the pulpit, with some old glass in it. A new boiler house was dug under the western half of the vestry (in the 1880s – date on radiator), and its N.W. corner was rebuilt, incorporating a fireplace and chimney. The cut through N. chancel wall (and foundation) can be seen in the boiler room below. The door into the Rood loft is in the S.E. corner of the nave. In 1871-2 a major restoration took place under Scott, when the boarded wagon roofs were put in (nave and chancel) and new pews were installed (and choir stalls). The c. 18th century pulpit was remodelled and has its larger tester removed. The west window contains 1874 Morris & Co glass with figures by Burne Jones. There is also much c. 1877 mosaic work on the lower chancel walls and a large Reredos. The chancel floor was also raised.

BUILDING MATERIALS (Incl. old plaster, paintings, glass, tiles, etc.): The main building materials are flintwork with Rag and Caenstone quoins/jambs, etc. However much of this has been removed externally by the heavy 19th century restoration. The nave arcades are of Reigate stone. The 15th century tower has fine large quoins of Kent Rag (Hythe/Folkestone stone with boring mollusc holes), and a few reused pieces of Caen, Reigate and Roman brick. The south chapel was "partly of brick" in 1846 (Glynne) but this has now gone in the Restoration. There is also some fine early post-medieval glass in the east window of this chapel.

(For medieval glass, wall paintings and floor tiles ,see above).

(Also 15th century choir stalls, see below). There are also the arms and Cardinals Cap of Cardinal Morton (hence 1494-1500) in the S.W. chancel window.

There are now 4 bells (2 J Hatch of 1618; Christopher Hodson 1685 and Robert Mot 1597). The later from St. Mary, Bredman, Canterbury was installed in 1975 (a cracked bell was ‘discarded’).

A late medieval brass (of John and Elizabeth Colwell) lies under the organ – another of 1617 (John Gibon) is under the choir stalls.

EXCEPTIONAL MONUMENTS IN CHURCH To Richard Hooker (1633) – originally on N chancel wall and moved to S chancel will c. 1865.

Also John Cockman (+1734) – also on N. chancel wall and moved to E. wall of N. aisle c. 1865 (when the organ was put under new vestry arch).

Also a fine Purbeck marble (14th century) grave slab under the N.E. corner of the tower.

There are also two fine 15th century (c. 1462) stall fronts in the chancel with carved panels and ends (and ‘poppy heads’). The added Victorian choir stalls copy them.

CHURCHYARD AND ENVIRONS: Shape: Rectangular

Condition: Good

Earthworks: enclosing: drop on N. and W. sides (?Ha-Ha) into Bourne Park adjacent:

Building in churchyard or on boundary: Lychgate of 1911

HISTORICAL RECORD (where known): Earliest ref. to church: Domesday Book

Evidence of pre-Norman status (DB, DM, TR etc.):

Late med. status: Rectory

Patron: The Archbishop

Other documentary sources: Test. Cant. (E. Kent 1907) 23 mentions ‘one piece of that stone on which the Archangel Gabriel descended when he saluted the ‘BVM’ to the Image of the BVM of the church of Bourne. Towards the work of the Church of Bourne, of the stalls and other reparations, 4 marcs. Wm. Haute (1462). Also ‘Beam, now before altar of B. Mary in the church’ (1477) and Lights of St. Mary, St. Katherine and St. Nicholas (1484) and light of Holy Cross (1462) and ‘The altar of St. Mary and St. Nicholas in the nave’ (1476).

SURVIVAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS: Inside present church: Good – main nave and chancel floor raised in 19th century (earlier levels should be intact beneath (except where burials, etc.).

Outside present church: Drainage trench cut round outside of church.

Quinquennial inspection (datearchitect): October 1987 David Martin

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL ASSESSMENT: The church and churchyard: A fine 13th and 15th century church, with an impressive collection of medieval wall paintings, stained glass, floor tiles and pew fronts inside. The 13th century architectural details of the chancel windows and nave arcade are very good. There are, no doubt, the remains of the earlier church beneath.

The wider context: One of a group of fine later 13th century rebuildings (cf. Hythe, Chartham, Adisham, etc.) REFERENCES: Notes by FC Elliston Erwood, Arch. Cant. 62 (1949), 101-3 (+ plan) + S. R. Glynne Notes on the Churches of Kent (1877), 130-1 (He visited in 1846); Hasted IX (1800), 335-7; Newman BOE (N.E. and E Kent) (3rd ed. 1983) 144-5.

Guide book: by Miss Alice Castle (1931, rev. 1961, 1969, 1980) – no plan.

Plans & drawings: Early 19th century engraving of interior looking W. NW (before restoration).

DATES VISITED: 25th November 1991 REPORT BY: Tim Tatton-Brown

www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/01/03/BIS.htm

——————————————-

BISHOPSBORNE LIES the next parish eastward from Bridge, described before, in the hundred of that name. It is called in Domesday, Burnes, that is, borne, from the bourn or stream which rises in it, being the head of the river, called the Lesser Stour; and it had the name of Bishopsborne from its belonging to the archbishop, and to distinguish it from the several other parishes of the same name in this neighbourhood. There is but one borough in this parish, namely, that of Bourne.

THIS PARISH lies about five miles eastward from Canterbury, just beyond Bridge, about half a mile from the Dover road, and the entrance of Barham downs in the valley on the left hand, where the church and village, the parsonage, the mansion and grounds of Bourne place, and the seat of Charlton at the opposite boundary, with the high hills behind them, topped with woods, from a most pleasing and luxuriant prospect indeed. In this beautiful valley, in which the Lesser Stour rises, and through which the Nailbourne at times runs, is the village of Bourne-street, consisting of about fifteen houses, and near it the small seat of Ofwalds, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, and now inhabited by his brother the Rev. Mr. Beckingham, and near it the church and court-lodge. On the rise of the hill is the parsonage, an antient building modernized, and much improved by the present rector Dr. Fowell, and from its whiteness a conspicuous object to the road and Barham downs. About a mile distant eastward, in the vale, close to the foot of the hills, is Charlton, in a low and damp situation, especially when the nailbourne runs. On the opposite side of the church westward, stands the ornament of this parish, the noble mansion of Bourne-place, (for several years inhabited by Sir Horace Mann, bart. but now by William Harrison, esq.) with its paddocks, grounds, and plantations, reaching up to the downs, having the bourn, which is the source of the Lesser Stour, which rises here in the front of it, directing its course from hence to Bridge, and so on by Littleborne, Ickham and Wickham, till it joins the Greater Stour river. This valley from this source of the bourn upwards, is dry, except after great rains, or thaws of snow, when the springs of the Nailbourn occasionally over flow at Liminge and Elham, and directing their course through this parish descend into the head of the bourn, and blend their waters with it. From this valley southward the opposite hills rise pretty high to the woodland, called Gosley wood, belonging to Mr. Beckingham, of large extent, and over a poor, barren and stony country, with rough healthy ground interspersed among it, to the valley at the southern boundary of the parish, adjoining to Hardres; near which is the house of Bursted, in a lonely unfrequented situations, hardly known to any one.

THE MANOR OF BOURNE, otherwise Bishopsborne, was given by one Aldhun, a man of some eminence in Canterbury, from his office of præfect, or bailiff of that city, (qui in hac regali villa bujus civitatis prafectus suit), (fn. 1) to the monks of Christ-church there, towards the support of their refectory. After which, anno 811, the monks exchanged it, among other estates, with archbishop Wlfred, for the manor of Eastry, and it continued part of the possessions of the see of Canterbury, at the time of taking the survey of Domesday, in which it is thus entered, under the title of the archbishop’s lands:

In Berham hundred, the archbishop himself holds Burnes in demesne. It was taxed for six sulings. The arable land is fifty carucates. In demesne there are five carucates, and sixty-four villeins, with fifty-three borderers having thirty carucates and an half. There is a church, and two mills of eight shillings and six pence, and twenty acres of meadow. Wood for the pannage of fifteen hogs. Of herbage twenty-seven pence. In its whole value, in the time of king Edward the Confessor, and afterwards, it was worth twenty pounds, now thirty pounds.

The manor of Bishopsborne appears by the above entry to have been at that time in the archbishop’s own hands, and it probably continued so as long as it remained part of his revenues, which was till the 35th year of king Henry VIII. when archbishop Cranmer, by an act specially passed for the purpose, exchanged this manor with the park, grounds and soil of the archbishop in this parish, called Langham park, with Thomas Colepeper, sen. esq. of Bedgbury, who that year alienated it to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, who gave this manor, with the rest of his possessions in this parish, to his second son Edward. Since which it has continued in the same line of ownership as Bourne-place, as will be more particularly mentioned hereafter, down to Stephen Beckingham, esq. the present owner of it. A court leet and court baron is held for this manor.

BOURNE-PLACE, formerly called the manor of Hautsbourne, is an eminent seat in this parish, for the manor has from unity of possession been for many years merged in the paramount manor of Bishopsborne. It was in very early times possessed by a family who took their name from it. Godric de Burnes is mentioned in the very beginning of the survey of Domesday, as the possessor of lands in it. John de Bourne had a grant of free-warren and other liberties for his lands in Bourne and Higham in the 16th year of king Edward I. He left an only daughter Helen, who carried this estate in marriage to John de Shelving, of Shelvingborne, whose grandson, of the same name, died anno 4 Edward III. at which time this manor had acquired from them the name of Shelvington. He left an only daughter and heir Benedicta, who carried it in marriage to Sir Edmund de Haut, of Petham, whose son Nicholas Haut gave to William, his youngest son, this estate of Bishopsborne, where he afterwards resided, and died in 1462, having been knight of the shire and sheriff of this county. From him it descended down to Sir William Haut, of Hautsborne, sheriff in the 16th and 29th year of king Henry VIII. whose son Edmund dying unmarried in his life-time, his two daughters, Elizabeth, married to Thomas Colepeper, esq. of Bedgbury, and Jane, to Sir Thomas Wyatt, of Allington-castle, became his coheirs, and on the division of their estates, this of Hautsborne was allotted to the former, and her hus band Thomas Colepeper, in her right, became possessed of it, and having acquired the manor of Bishopsborne by exchange from the archbishop, anno 35 Henry VIII. immediately afterwards passed away both that and Hautsborne to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, whose family derived their origin from Ealcher, or Aucher, the first earl of Kent, who had the title of duke likewise, from his being intrusted with the military power of the county. He is eminent in history for his bravery against the Danes, in the year 853. They first settled at Newenden, where more of the early account of them may be seen. He at his death gave them to his second son Edward, who afterwards resided here at Shelvington, alias Hautsborne, as it was then called, whose great-grandson Sir Anthony Aucher was created a baronet in 1666, and resided here. He left surviving two sons Anthony and Hewitt, and two daughters, Elizabeth, afterwards married to John Corbett, esq. of Salop, LL. D. and Hester, to the Rev. Ralph Blomer, D. D. prebendary of Canterbury. He died in 1692, and was succeeded by his eldest son, who dying under age and unmarried, Hewitt his brother succeeded him in title and estate, but he dying likewise unmarried about the year 1726, the title became extinct, but his estates devolved by his will to his elder sister Elizabeth, who entitled her husband Dr. Corbett afterwards to them, and he died possessed of the manor of Bishopsborne, with this seat, which seems then to have been usually called Bourneplace, in 1736, leaving his five daughters his coheirs, viz. Katherine, afterwards married to Stephen Beckingham, esq. Elizabeth, to the Rev. Thomas Denward; Frances, to Sir William Hardres, bart. Antonina, to Ignat. Geohegan, esq. and Margaret-Hannah-Roberta, to William Hougham, esq. of Canterbury, the four latter of whom, with their respective husbands, in 1752, jointed in the sale of their shares in this estate to Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-men tioned, who then became possessed of the whole of it. He married first the daughter of Mr. Cox, by whom he had the present Stephen beckingham, esq. who married Mary, daughter of the late John Sawbridge, esq. of Ollantigh, deceased, by whom he had an only daughter, who married John-George Montague, esq. eldest son of John, lord viscount Hinchingbrooke, since deceased. By his second wife Catherine, daughter of Dr. John Corbet, he had two daughters, Charlotte and Catherine, both married, one to Mr. Dillon and the other to Mr. Gregory; and a son John Charles, in holy orders, and now rector of Upper Hardres. They bear for their arms, Argent, a sess, crenelle, between three escallop shells, sable. He died in 1756, and his son Stephen Beckingham, esq. above-mentioned, now of Hampton-court, is the present owner of the manor of Bishopsborne, and the mansion of Bourneplace.

BURSTED is a manor, in the southern part of this parish, obscurely situated in an unfrequented valley, among the woods, next to Hardres. It is in antient deeds written Burghsted, and was formerly the property of a family of the same name, in which it remained till it was at length sold to one of the family of Denne, of Dennehill, in Kingston, and it continued so till Thomas Denne, esq. of that place, in Henry VIII.’s reign, gave it to his son William, whose grandson William, son of Vincent Denne, LL. D. died possessed of it in 1640, and from him it descended down to Mr. Thomas Denne, gent. of Monkton-court, in the Isle of Thanet, who died not many years since, and his widow Mrs. Elizabeth Denne, of Monktoncourt, is the present possessor of it.

CHARLTON is a seat, in the eastern part of this parish, which was formerly the estate of a family named Herring, in which it continued till William Herring, anno 3 James I. conveyed it to John Gibbon, gent. the third son of Thomas Gibbon, of Frid, in Bethers den, descended again from those of Rolvenden, and he resided here, and died possessed of it in 1617, as did his son William in 1632, whose heirs passed it away to Sir Anthony Aucher, bart. whose son Sir Hewitt Aucher, bart. in 1726, gave it by will to his sister Elizabeth, and she afterwards carried it in marriage to John Corbett, LL. D. of Salop, who died possessed of it in 1735, leaving his window surviving, after whose death in 1764 it came to her five daughters and coheirs, who, excepting Frances, married to Sir William Hardres, bart. joined with their husbands in the sale of their respective fifth parts of it in 1765, to Francis Hender Foote, clerk, who resided here. Mr. Foote was first a barrister-at-law, and then took orders. He married Catherine, third daughter of Robert Mann, esq. of Linton, by whom he had three sons, John, mentioned below, who is married and has issue; Robert, rector of Boughton Malherb, and vicar of Linton, who married Anne, daughter of Dobbins Yate, esq. of Gloucestershire, and Edward, in the royal navy; and three daughters, of whom two died unmarried, and Catherine, the second, married first Mr. Ross, and secondly Sir Robert Herries, banker, of London. Mr. Foote died possessed of them in 1773, leaving his wife Catherine surviving, who possessed them at her death in 1776, on which they descended to their eldest son John Foote, esq. of Charlton, who in 1784, purchased of the heirs of lady Hardres, deceased, the remaining fifth part, and so became possessed of the whole of it, of which he is the present owner, but Mr. Turner now resides in it.

Charities. MRS. ELIZABETH CORBETT, window, executrix of Sir Hewit Aucher, bart. deceased, in 1749, made over to trustees, for the use and benefit of the poor, a tenement called Bonnetts, and half an acre of land adjoining, in this parish; now occupied by two poor persons, but if rented, of the annual value of 3l.

The poor constantly relieved are about eleven, casually seven.

THIS PARISH is within the ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION of the diocese of Canterbury, and deanry of Bridge.

¶The church, which is dedicated to St. Mary, is a large building, consisting of three isles and three chancels, having a tower steeple at the west end, in which are four bells. This church is a large handsome building, but it is not kept so comely as it ought to be. In the chancel is a monument for Richard Hooker, rector of this parish, who died in 1600; on it is his bust, in his black gown and square cap. A monument for John Cockman, M. D. of Charlton. His widow lies in the vault by him, obt. 1739; arms, Argent, three cocks, gules, impaling Dyke. Memorial for Petronell, wife of Dr. John Fowell, the present rector, second daughter of William Chilwich, esq. of Devonshire, obt. 1766. She lies buried in a vault under the altar. A large stone, twelve feet long, supposed to be over the remains of Mr. Richard Hooker. A memorial on brass for John Gibbon, gent. of this parish, obt. 1617; arms, Gibbon, a lion rampant-guardant, between three escallops, impaling Hamon, of Acrise, quartering Cossington. Memorials for Mrs. Jane Gibbon, his wife, obt. 1625, and for William Gibbon, gent. obt. 1632. A memorial for William Gresham, obt. 1718. In one of the windows are the arms of the see of Canterbury impaling Warham. In the middle isle, in the south wall, above the capital of the pillar, opposite the pulpit, is a recess, in which once stood the image of the Virgin Mary, the patron saint of this church, to which William Hawte, esq. by will anno 1462, among the rest of his relics, gave a piece of the stone on which the archangel Gabriel descended, when he saluted her, for this image to rest its feet upon. On the pavement near this, seemingly over a vault, is a stone with an inscription in brass, for William, eldest son of Sir William Hawt. A memorial for Farnham Aldersey, gent. of this parish, only son of Farnham Aldersey, gent. of Maidstone, obt. 1733. Memorials for several of the Dennes, of this parish. In a window of the south isle, are the arms of Haut, impaling Argent, a lion rampant-guardant, azure. The south chancel is inclosed and made into a handsome pew for the family of Bourne-place, under which is a vault appropriated to them. The window of it eastward is a very handsome one, mostly of modern painted glass; the middle parts filled up with scripture history, and the surrounding compartments with the arms and different marriages impaled of the family of Beckingham. On each side of this window are two ranges of small octagon tablets of black marble, intended for the family of Aucher, and their marriages, but they were not continued. In the church-yard, on the south side, is a vault for the family of Foote, of Charlton, and a tomb for Mrs. Elizabeth Corbett, obt. 1764; arms, Corbett, which were Or, two ravens, sable, within a bordure, gules, bezantee. At the north-east corner of the church-porch are several tombs for the Dennes.

The church of Bishopsborne, with the chapel of Barham annexed, was antiently appendant to the manor, and continued so till the exchange made between the archbishop and Thomas Colepeper, in the 35th year of king Henry VIII. out of which the advowson of this rectory was excepted. Since which it has continued parcel of the possessions of the see of Canterbury to the present time, his grace the archbishop being the present patron of it.

This rectory, (including the chapel of Barham annexed to it) is valued in the king’s books at 39l. 19s. 2d. and the yearly tenths at 3l. 19s. 11d. In 1588 here were communicants one hundred. In 1640 one hundred and forty-eight, and it was valued, with Barham, at two hundred and fifty pounds per annum.

Church of Bishopsborne with the Chapel of Barhan annexed.

www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol9/pp328-337

—————————————–

Richard Hooker (March 1554 – 3 November 1600) was an English priest in the Church of England and an influential theologian.[2] He was one of the most important English theologians of the sixteenth century.[3] His defence of the role of redeemed reason informed the theology of the seventeenth century Caroline Divines and later provided many members of the Church of England with a theological method which combined the claims of revelation, reason and tradition.[3] Scholars disagree regarding Hooker’s relationship with what would later be called "Anglicanism" and the Reformed theological tradition. Traditionally, he has been regarded as the originator of the Anglican via media between Protestantism and Catholicism.[4]:1 However, a growing number of scholars have argued that he should be considered as being in the mainstream Reformed theology of his time and that he only sought to oppose the extremists (Puritans), rather than moving the Church of England away from Protestantism.

This sermon from 1585 was one of those that triggered Travers attack and appeal to the Privy Council. Travers accused Hooker of preaching doctrine favourable to the Church of Rome when in fact he had just described their differences emphasising that Rome attributed to works "a power of satisfying God for sin;…" For Hooker, works were a necessary expression of thanksgiving for unmerited justification by a merciful God.[11] Hooker defended his belief in the doctrine of Justification by faith, but argued that even those who did not understand or accept this could be saved by God.

Of the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Politie is Hooker’s best-known work, with the first four books being published in 1594. The fifth was published in 1597, while the final three were published posthumously,[2] and indeed may not all be his own work. Structurally, the work is a carefully worked out reply to the general principles of Puritanism as found in The Admonition and Thomas Cartwright’s follow-up writings, more specifically:

Scripture alone is the rule that should govern all human conduct; Scripture prescribes an unalterable form of Church government; The English Church is corrupted by Roman Catholic orders, rites, etc.; The law is corrupt in not allowing lay elders; ‘There ought not to be in the Church Bishops’.[12] Of the Lawes has been characterised as "probably the first great work of philosophy and theology to be written in English."[13] The book is far more than a negative rebuttal of the puritan claims: it is (here McAdoo quotes John S. Marshall) ‘a continuous and coherent whole presenting a philosophy and theology congenial to the Anglican Book of Common Prayer and the traditional aspects of the Elizabethan Settlement."[14]

Quoting C. S. Lewis,[15] Stephen Neill underlines its positive side in the following terms: Hitherto, in England, "controversy had involved only tactics; Hooker added strategy. Long before the close fighting in Book III begins, the puritan position has been rendered desperate by the great flanking movements in Books I and II. . . . Thus the refutation of the enemy comes in the end to seem a very small thing, a by-product."[16]

It is a massive work that deals mainly with the proper governance of the churches ("polity"). The Puritans advocated the demotion of clergy and ecclesiasticism. Hooker attempted to work out which methods of organising churches are best.[2] What was at stake behind the theology was the position of the Queen Elizabeth I as the Supreme Governor of the Church. If doctrine were not to be settled by authorities, and if Martin Luther’s argument for the priesthood of all believers were to be followed to its extreme with government by the Elect, then having the monarch as the governor of the church was intolerable. On the other side, if the monarch were appointed by God to be the governor of the church, then local parishes going their own ways on doctrine were similarly intolerable.

In political philosophy, Hooker is best remembered for his account of law and the origins of government in Book One of the Politie. Drawing heavily on the legal thought of Thomas Aquinas, Hooker distinguishes seven forms of law: eternal law ("that which God hath eternally purposed himself in all his works to observe"), celestial law (God’s law for the angels), nature’s law (that part of God’s eternal law that governs natural objects), the law of reason (dictates of Right Reason that normatively govern human conduct), human positive law (rules made by human lawmakers for the ordering of a civil society), divine law (rules laid down by God that can only be known by special revelation), and ecclesiastical law (rules for the governance of a church). Like Aristotle, whom he frequently quotes, Hooker believes that humans are naturally inclined to live in society. Governments, he claims, are based on both this natural social instinct and on the express or implied consent of the governed.

The Laws is remembered not only for its stature as a monumental work of Anglican thought, but also for its influence in the development of theology, political theory, and English prose.

Hooker worked largely from Thomas Aquinas, but he adapted scholastic thought in a latitudinarian manner. He argued that church organisation, like political organisation, is one of the "things indifferent" to God. He wrote that minor doctrinal issues were not issues that damned or saved the soul, but rather frameworks surrounding the moral and religious life of the believer. He contended there were good monarchies and bad ones, good democracies and bad ones, and good church hierarchies and bad ones: what mattered was the piety of the people. At the same time, Hooker argued that authority was commanded by the Bible and by the traditions of the early church, but authority was something that had to be based on piety and reason rather than automatic investiture. This was because authority had to be obeyed even if it were wrong and needed to be remedied by right reason and the Holy Spirit. Notably, Hooker affirmed that the power and propriety of bishops need not be in every case absolute.

King James I is quoted by Izaak Walton, Hooker’s biographer, as saying, "I observe there is in Mr. Hooker no affected language; but a grave, comprehensive, clear manifestation of reason, and that backed with the authority of the Scriptures, the fathers and schoolmen, and with all law both sacred and civil."[17] Hooker’s emphasis on Scripture, reason, and tradition considerably influenced the development of Anglicanism, as well as many political philosophers, including John Locke.[2] Locke quotes Hooker numerous times in the Second Treatise of Civil Government and was greatly influenced by Hooker’s natural-law ethics and his staunch defence of human reason. As Frederick Copleston notes, Hooker’s moderation and civil style of argument were remarkable in the religious atmosphere of his time.[18] In the Church of England he is celebrated with a Lesser Festival on 3 November and the same day is also observed in the Calendars of other parts of the Anglican Communion.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hooker

Posted by Jelltex on 2018-01-22 19:42:25

Tagged: , St Mary the Virgin , Bishopsbourne , Kent , Church , Jelltex , Jelltecks

The post St Mary the Virgin, Bishopsbourne, Kent appeared first on Good Info.

0 notes

kululumoya-blog · 7 years

Text

Or ‘My Button Keeps Popping off My Pants and other Sad Stories’

I am fortunate to have been pretty much the same shape and size my whole adult life but now I have bumped into a bit of a mental hurdle and I’m literally clambering over it to the next dress size up. It hasn’t been a good dayyear trying to pretend my trousers still fit around my waist.

In talking about what you should not eat – ie dieting – has your body shape ever been compared to a piece of food? For example ‘apple’, ‘pear’, or if you’re VERY unusual, ‘inverted carrot’. (I made the last one up – it applies to the male physique). Terribly bad luck if you’re over in the cake category, like nobody loves to have a ‘muffin-top’ do they? But at least muffins are kinda cute and tasty! OOH, imagine being shaped like a koeksuster (if you are not south african, they look like this:)

They are so utterly sticky syrupy and delicious that they are the best thing to eat if ‘cake shaped’ is what you aspire towards.

I think my shape could probably be called ‘broad bean’, no, not just one bean on it’s own, but a little line of them in the pod. From the front I’m more or less straight (well I used to be) but from a different angle I’m full of irregular bumps.

I wouldn’t mind if the bumps that are meant to be bigger are actually bigger than those that are meant to be smaller but sadly my breasts are slowly being out-bumped by my tummy. I am fully blaming my tiny bosom size. In fact the word bosom could hardly ever refer to me. As my youngest daughter says, I have no ‘line’ running down between my ‘girls’.

When I was an impressionable, self conscious teenager, they were referred to as ‘mosquito bites’ by my nearest and dearest. So you see, I have no pride in my top deck area, only disdain and to be absolutely perfectly honestly frank (I have NOT admitted this before) I think I may suffer from breast envy (I’m blushing now!)

And for that reason, I NEVER make remarks about my three girls’ body shapes that is in anyway disparaging.

But the truth is, although I’m approaching middle age and am spreading a bit around the middle, I am just plain lucky with my shape – it’s all in my jeans apparently (?). They say you grow to become the shape you inherit and it’s very little to do with your diet or exercise regime. (Unless you are eating platefuls designed for more than one person at a time while lying on the couch – honestly you need to be a little sensible and self-examining and hence I will be upping my fitness programme and not taking that extra biscuit anymore).

And so this brings me to the nutshell of my food discourse. I have to reveal another kernel of truth (apart from my breast reveal), I am so SICK to DEATH of these incessant food fads and silly diets in our Western culture because of the way they convince us to buy ‘healthier’ when it’s those who are promoting the ‘diets’ who benefit.

I’m angry because I grew up in a country where people are starving and are only too thankful to have anything to eat. How dare anyone suggest to the poverty stricken that ‘organic/paleo/xyz free’ is the way to shop? How have we lost perspective on eating? How have we become so obsessed with food that we spend billions on wasting it while billions of our brothers and sisters are dying for lack of it?

In April we were driving through South Africa and stopped off in a one horse town where the horse was probably eaten already – all that was left were a few scraggly goats wandering the main road. Three small boys, the age of my own kids, dressed in rags you or I would have thrown away five years ago, came to me asking for food. They were shuffling in their weakness and I cried afterwards when we drove away. I had given them the picnic we hadn’t eaten and they carefully shared it fairly amongst themselves. I was upset by the injustice and suffering though and resolved to always travel with food to give away.

KODAK Digital Still Camera

Back home in our neat and pristine European environment I can’t help but wonder. It is one thing to have to eat certain foods for serious health reasons – like illness or allergy – but perLEASE, why is the space allocated to the ‘gluten free’ section in the supermarket FAR larger than the percentage of people in the world who actually are allergic to gluten? Is this just a fad, making money for the supermarket?!!

So I think it’s time for a health change in our culture, we need to be healthy in our exercise and eating HABITS. How about we obsessed less about what we eat, spend less time eating for a start and spend more time acting on what other people need to eat?

‘broad bean’ and other edible body shapes…? Or 'My Button Keeps Popping off My Pants and other Sad Stories' I am fortunate to have been pretty much the same shape and size my whole adult life but now I have bumped into a bit of a mental hurdle and I'm literally clambering over it to the next dress size up.

#body shapes #diets #Food #malnutrition #poverty

0 notes

safari-west-rec-blog · 7 years

Text

Conservation Corner

They Can’t All be Pandas

By: Brian Eberly

As a safari guide at Safari West, one of the questions I am most often asked is: what is my favorite animal? There are two ways to interpret this question: what’s my favorite animal within the Safari West collection or what is my favorite species in the world? I usually answer the latter and I tend to lead with, “whatever animal I most recently learned something incredible about.” This answer is both honest and useful in my tour as I then get to segue to an educational and entertaining topic. Recently, my follow-up to this answer has been, “Currently, my favorite species is one that lives at Safari West, but is not in our collection: the California ground squirrel.” If you are familiar with ground squirrels, it’s possible that you count yourself among those who do not like them. They aren’t the most popular of animals however, when you begin to learn about wildlife, ecosystems and conservation, native life forms like the ground squirrel turn out to be critically important. Many, if not most, of the more unpopular species of the world are actually pretty awesome when you examine their survival strategies or role in the ecosystem.

Ground squirrels are often loathed by farmers and ranchers as their burrows present hazards for livestock and they can be quite destructive to crops: eating vegetables and damaging trees by either girdling the base (eating the bark all the way around the tree) or burrowing beneath the tree and drying out roots. Be that as it may, one cannot deny how hardcore ground squirrels are when it comes to the ever-important challenge of avoiding predation. While ground squirrels make a pretty nice meal for most of the larger snakes in their range, they have adapted an effective defense against rattlesnakes. Rattlers do prey on squirrels, mostly the pups, but the adults are quite ready to handle a rattlesnake attack. First, unlike the babies, adult ground squirrels are resistant to rattlesnake venom (to varying degrees throughout their range). Rattlesnakes tend to bite prey and back off, allowing their venom time to work. In the case of a ground squirrel, that means dinner gets away. But waiting for a predator to attack you and then hoping your anti-venom-super-power does the job isn’t necessarily a great survival strategy, so these squirrels also offer up a very sophisticated defense. They basically get dangerously close to a rattler, stare it in the face like a bad movie protagonist daring a much larger opponent to a fight, and wave their tail back and forth. While they are waving said tail, they increase blood flow to it, thus heating it slightly. As rattlesnakes can perceive in infrared, they see the hot, swinging tail very clearly. Tail waving or tail flagging is still being studied, but it does appear to deter snake strikes. The most convincing idea on why this works is that the tail flagging sends a message. It seems to say “I see you. Look how fast I can move, I’m paying really close attention and if you strike I will probably dodge it.”

Another really amazing animal that inhabits the Safari West property and the surrounding mountains, is the grey fox. Full disclosure, I’ve only seen fox scat and tracks at Safari West, but I have seen them running about in the neighborhood just beyond our boundaries. Like the ground squirrel, foxes get a bad rap–preying on chickens, digging in garbage or compost, harassing house cats–but they are amazing (and in the spirit of learning, what the fox says does not involve “rings” or “dings” as the pop song suggests. Their vocalizations mostly sounds like a cross between a hacking cough and a bark). Grey foxes are the only canine in north or south American that can climb trees. They are reported to be able to climb limbless tree trunks dozens of feet off of the ground. For a fairly small animal–roughly the size of a typical house cat–they can jump fairly well too. I’ve seen one casually leap a six foot fence from a standstill (after I startled it out of my compost pile) as though it were hopping up a curb. Grey foxes are skilled hunters preying mostly on rodents and to a lesser degree lagomorphs (rabbits/hares/etc) but they are also omnivores and opportunistic, meaning they will eat what they can get when they can get it. In Sonoma County, this is evident during the times of year when manzanita and madrone trees are producing berries, because fox scat will often appear to be mostly berries.

Aside from being skilled hunters and climbers, having foxes around could potentially be a good thing if you are worried about Lyme disease. As mentioned earlier, foxes eat small rodents and small rodents are the primary vector for carrying the ticks that spread Lyme. While the science on this is far from settled, there does seem to be a negative correlation between fox population and Lyme disease (but remember that correlation is not causation). It stands to reason that more foxes means fewer rodents means less Lyme. Lyme disease notwithstanding, if you have a rodent problem, and don’t want to introduce a subsidised predator that would also kill a bunch of birds (ie an outdoor cat. See last month’s post) encouraging, or at least not discouraging your local fox population could help keep the rodent population at bay.

Another amazing animal that catches a bad rap is the turkey vulture. Their bald, wrinkly, bright red heads are usually enough for any casual observer to call them ugly. If aesthetics are your primary concern however, you may be happy to learn that turkey vultures have beautiful eggs. They are a delicate pale purplish color with brown blotches; like a naturally occurring Easter egg. Pretty eggs aside, turkey vultures are a super important part of the ecosystem. They are carrion eaters–meaning they eat dead things–hence the feather-free head. When your meal plan includes sticking your head inside a carcass, having bloody head feathers until your next bath is a little maladaptive. Eating dead animals makes these vultures nature’s cleaning crew, cleaning up the carcasses left when other animals die. While you might get past the gross factor of eating dead animals, another incredible adaptation turkey vultures have, which you might not let slide, is called urohidrosis, where they basically defecate/urinate on their feet so when the excrement evaporates, it cools them. I do encourage you to get past the gross factor, because they are quite elegant birds. Watching them soar effortlessly on thermal updrafts is an incredible sight, especially considering they are usually about as long from wingtip to wingtip as I am from head to toe. Take a moment to enjoy their grace the next time you see them circling overhead or sunning their wings in the morning. They are not an omen of death, just a convenient and critical clean-up crew.

As captivated as one can be by often disenfranchised animals that are either gross, ugly or a nuisance, it is worth considering that public appreciation for species can be the difference between continued existence and extinction.

While many are aware of the plight of some of the iconic primates in Africa (ie chimpanzees and gorillas) there are many African primate species that are threatened or endangered that people never hear about. Take the aye-aye, a small lemur (around five pounds) that has the oddest way of finding food and is quite odd looking as well. While they have the primate standard five fingers per hand, two of these digits are highly specialized. Their middle finger is different from the rest, and used to tap on trees. The tapping works like sonar, allowing them to find insect larva inside the tree. They then chew a hole in the tree and and use their extra long ring finger to fish the larva out of the hole. It’s pretty cool that they fill the same niche as woodpeckers.

These unique creatures tend to catch a bad rap from the locals. They are often considered to be omens of evil and are frequently killed on sight. It is however, worth pointing out that not all populations hold this negative belief and some consider the aye-aye a symbol of good luck. All the same, they are listed as endangered by the IUCN, with a reduction in their population of over 50% in the last 30 years. Their numbers are dropping for many reasons including habitat destruction and hunting as a nuisance animal (to protect crops) or for food (in some populations). The IUCN lists the practice of hunting due to the “evil omen” stigma as one of the influential factors in the species’ declining numbers.

Just like we have vulture species living around Safari West, there are vulture species that live in Africa too. Unlike our turkey vultures (which are a species of least concern according to the IUCN), many of the African vulture species have declining populations and are listed as threatened. A large factor in the global decline of vultures is bioaccumulation; the process through which toxic substances build up in the animal faster than their bodies can clear it out. With vultures, this bioaccumulation tends to be of manmade toxins like pesticides and such.

Many African vultures also face an additional, well-known threat, but one not usually associated with vultures; the illegal ivory and rhino horn trades. The connection is that poachers dislike the way vultures will quickly smell a kill and circle, enmass, overhead, thus alerting anti-poaching patrols to a potential incident. To combat this natural alarm system, when rhino and elephant poachers are finished removing the horns or tusks, they will often poison the carcass. This kills the vultures that feed on it (and many other scavengers too). We hear about the plight of the rhinos and the elephants because they are large, charismatic species and their deaths hit us hard. Often ignored are the “gross” and unpopular vultures.

To those involved in wildlife conservation, it is quite obvious the cute, charismatic, popular, or well known animals get the bulk of conservation attention. Case in point, the average guest at Safari West tends to be super excited to see our plains zebras and are usually bummed if they happen to be hiding that day. Rarely do those same guests know what a waldrapp ibis is, let alone get excited to see one on tour. This is unfortunate, since compared to the three quarters of a million or so zebras in the wild, the waldrapp ibis numbers just a couple of hundred. That’s like comparing the population of San Francisco (zebras) to the population of a small high school (waldrapp ibis). The Waldrapp Ibis is a critically endangered species and it’s not that people don’t care, it’s just that most of them don’t even know that they exist in the first place.

Some species have been able to bridge that gap and move from disliked or obscure to well known and beloved. Orcas (ie killer whales), for example, were once a largely unknown and unpopular animal, now, ironically, people love them so much, they are being phased out of the aquariums and aquatic parks that initially introduced the species to the public. Pangolins–purported to be one of the most heavily poached species on earth–have seen a recent rise to fame (possibly due to viral social media attention), leading to an increase in public awareness of their plight. Even the grey wolf, once considered a grave threat to the ranching industry and nearly wiped out, has made a recovery and achieved increased popularity

The world of conservation is making great strides in trying to bring attention to the less famous or photogenic species of the world. We do our part at Safari West, but we’re far from alone. There is an incredible project called the Photo Ark, being put together by National Geographic photographer Joel Sartore. His project aims to give every animal species in captivity studio-quality treatment. He is roughly half way through photographing the 12,000 or so species living in zoos or other human-managed settings worldwide, giving equal treatment to every species, be it cute or ugly, charismatic or gross, popular or obscure. In a recent interview, Jartore said, “A mouse is every bit as glorious as an elephant, and a tiger beetle is every bit as big and important as a tiger.” Just because animals are annoying or unpopular, does not mean they are not a wonderful part of our world with something amazing to share. They can’t all be lovable, iconic species and while I do not want to live in a world without elephants, lions, pandas or rhinos, it would be a shame if those species were the only ones we work to conserve.

#Conservation Corner #grey fox #turkey vulture #ground squirrel

0 notes